• Trump laments First Amendment: "Our press is allowed to say whatever they want"
    144 replies, posted
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51254351]Trump doesn't have friends in high places? How high are you? He's backed by Peter Thiel one of the most effective lobbying billionaires around. He's got a life time of lobbying experience. He will pay, manipulate, lie cheat fraud, all of his business tactics. As a president. No fucking thank you[/QUOTE] the danger of trump as president comes from the cult of personality he has created around himself, not so much from his lobbying experience.
[QUOTE=CroGamer002;51253695]2nd Amendment is only thing that matters to these people. They couldn't not care less for 1st nor 4th Amendments.[/QUOTE] You still have to remeber that the second amendment exists to preserve all the other amendments. I
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;51254486]You still have to remeber that the second amendment exists to preserve all the other amendments. I[/QUOTE] i thought that it was the first amendment which protected all the others having a gun is nowhere near as empowering as it is to speak your mind freely
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51254497] 2nd Amendment hasnt been relevant for 230 years. [/QUOTE] It was put in place to guard against tyranny. Looking at both Clinton and Trump, I think it is extremely relevant these days.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51254501]i thought that it was the first amendment which protected all the others having a gun is nowhere near as empowering as it is to speak your mind freely[/QUOTE] having a gun can help ensure you can have the capability to speak your mind freely
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51254519]People like you is the reason JoeySkylnyx is running into the woods in November[/QUOTE] I am not advocating for this "grab sks, go innawoods" or "preppers" type thinking. But I do believe that an armed populace deters tyrannical action. Edit: [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51254519] Go assasinate Hillary, we'll play Sonic death sound effects at your funeral The delusion, GOD[/QUOTE] And no, I am not advocating for assassination either, nice straw-man argument tho. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51254497] 2nd Amendment exists to keep people paranoid and stock food and munitions[/QUOTE] I would encourage you to learn about American politics before you discuss American politics.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51254529]having a gun can help ensure you can have the capability to speak your mind freely[/QUOTE] what do you mean by this?
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;51254588]what do you mean by this?[/QUOTE] an armed populace is theoretically more capable of protecting their ability to speak without fear of government repercussions than an unarmed one.
I completely agree with him on this, but isn't that what we already have somewhat? Libel / Slander / etc laws The media should be allowed to say what it wants so long as it's not broad-strokes of pure misinformation, regardless of who they're targeting. That, and we need an organization that prevents shit like "[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/us/landlord-lets-reporters-into-san-bernardino-suspects-apartment.html"]Landlord Lets Reporters Into San Bernardino Suspects’ Home[/URL]"
yes, yes they are trump. Your advisor at Infowars is allowed to makeup all the crazy shit he wants without any sort of ethical code and gets away with it all the time. We live in a country where freedom of the press, even the bad horrible press, is important and you and your billionaire friends may be able to buy up papers but they can't sue us all into submission.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51254608]an armed populace is theoretically more capable of protecting their ability to speak without fear of government repercussions than an unarmed one.[/QUOTE] true but pointing a gun at someone is more likely to provide you those governmental repercussions than whatever you have to say, plus people will probably think you've gone crazy and not care at all
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;51254628]true but pointing a gun at someone is more likely to provide you those governmental repercussions than whatever you have to say, plus people will probably think you've gone crazy and not care at all[/QUOTE] It is a fine balance.
[QUOTE=Cructo;51254647]why do people like to assume that anyone who has a gun is only going to use it to threaten other people lol[/QUOTE] That's pretty much the point of using it for defense
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51254608]an armed populace is theoretically more capable of protecting their ability to speak without fear of government repercussions than an unarmed one.[/QUOTE] The second amendment arguments would be s lot more credible if people just admitted the reason it's still around is because shooting guns is fun and not because you have a right to rise up against the government.
[QUOTE=Cructo;51254647]why do people like to assume that anyone who has a gun is only going to use it to threaten other people lol[/QUOTE] well, regardless whether you're using it to attack or defend, it's a weapon, it can hurt you really bad so it's a threat to anyone that's being targeted
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51254529]having a gun can help ensure you can have the capability to speak your mind freely[/QUOTE] no it doesn't, it just ensures that you can shoot people there's a reason that countries where you can get guns freely as much as you like (like sub-saharan africa and latin america) and where even children commonly tote rifles aren't free places there's a reason as well that the freedom to speech is the 1st amendment, and not the 2nd. when the constitution was being drafted, somebody thought about putting the right to free speech before the right to firearms, and i'm assuming that people who respect the constitution would probably realise why these guys did that
[QUOTE=Cructo;51254711]banning guns in these places is going to make them good right[/QUOTE] what? there are numerous examples of countries where there is a massive proliferation of firearms amongst the general populace (as a result of civil wars and the like) that affords them the ability to overthrow the government i am curious as to why a well-armed citizenry has routinely failed to produce any kind of stable and free government in these nations [editline]24th October 2016[/editline] i mean it's pretty obvious from a cursory glance of history that throwing guns in the hands of peasants and having them go around overthrowing presidents is not the secret to a free society
I just don't understand the american paranoia of a tyrannical government and how having a gun is going to help
[QUOTE=Cructo;51254711]banning guns in these places is going to make them good right[/QUOTE] This is really the worst thing you could've said, possibly second only to a series of grunts and whistles.
[QUOTE=Cructo;51254711]banning guns in these places is going to make them good right[/QUOTE] When they wouldn't be able to enforce a ban there's no point. You can, however, look to European nations without laws similar to the 2nd amendment - free speech is alive and well, so is there really any reason to assume the 2nd amendment is protecting it? I don't really care whether the US has guns or not, but calling the 1st and 2nd amendment equally important is a bit laughable in my book.
[QUOTE=TheHydra;51254117]there is absolutely no excuse to vote for trump at this point. he used a speech that was supposed to preview his first 100 days in office to say he would sue women who accused him of sexual assault and put hillary in prison, and now he's attacking the most important right we have in this country. this is on top of spending the past couple months telling his voters that the election itself is rigged. he's the most unamerican candidate we've ever had and anyone who supports him is an idiot. i don't care if you vote hillary or not, just don't fucking vote for trump.[/QUOTE] Still would rather vote for Trump over Hillary any day (Not voting for either of them). Even though trump can act like a pig I still TRUST him more that Hillary. Hillary has shown herself as a liar and a thief, and has gotten away with many things that any other person would be thrown in jail for. But most people overlook or just plain ignore that part of her. And just take everything she says as truth. The fact that people ignore everything she DID and just focus on what trump SAYS, it's like people have lost their minds. Is Trump good? PPPBBBFFFFT NO! Is Hillary good. PPPBBBFFFFT NO! It's like Republicans nominated the ONLY person who could lose to Hillary. It's like the DEM and GOP got together and said "Hey let's nominate the absolutely WORST politicians in america to become president!"
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51254529]having a gun can help ensure you can have the capability to speak your mind freely[/QUOTE] if you need a gun just to speak your mind then you're not exactly speaking freely
[QUOTE]Well in England, they have a system where you can actually sue if somebody says something wrong. Our press is allowed to say whatever they want and they can get away with it, and I think we should go to a system where if they do something wrong--I'm a big believer, tremendous believer in freedom of the press. Nobody believes it stronger than me. But if they make terrible, terrible mistakes, and those mistakes are made on purpose, to injure people--and I'm not just talking about me, I'm talking about anybody else--then yes, i think they should be. You should have the ability to sue them.[/QUOTE] Wow, it's just libel/slander, he just wants to expand the definition of it. That doesn't seem like much. [editline]24th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Gwoodman;51254750]I just don't understand the american paranoia of a tyrannical government and how having a gun is going to help[/QUOTE] It helps a lot better than not having a gun, which is the whole point. There's a symbolism in the 2nd amendment about the trust relationship between the government and the people.
[QUOTE=Cone;51255133]if you need a gun just to speak your mind then you're not exactly speaking freely[/QUOTE] i don't need guns to speak my mind in much the same way i don't need fire insurance for my house to not burn down. currently, yeah, i don't need to use guns to have free speech, but i also cannot tell the future. i don't know how things are going to go, and thus would rather have an additional layer beyond the legal routes to ensure that that freedom can remain.
I think it's a fallacy that having a gun makes you free. one can be easily oppressed and shoved into an atomised corner but they feel like they are free because they get to go shoot some tincans and own a gun. The right to free speech trumps the right to firearms any and all of the time. Guns give you the power to destroy (whenever it be an old political system or a life). free speech grants me the power to think and to discuss, in turn the ability to create something more and as such is a considerably more powerful thing. A gun is a physical entity - a mere chunk of materialistic metal. my most essential freedoms are those immaterial - and a gun is not one of those. America is the sole nation on the planet where it claims to safeguard its freedoms by guns - in spite of the fact that there are literally dozens of nations crammed full of well-armed common people who fail time and time again to establish the conditions for freedom and instead end up with dictator after dictator. Why is it that every nation in Europe established a prosperous and free society without the need to get a second amendment? The idea that a gun gives you freedom - that only by owning this piece of complex machinery can I only ever be called a free man in control of my destiny? Bullshit.
[quote]I'm a tremendous believer in the freedom of press. Nobody believes it stronger than me.[/quote] Besides the fact these are now the most [I]Donald Trump[/I] words ever spoken, it's quite telling that he commonly feels the need to praise himself and put everyone else down.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51255499]i don't need guns to speak my mind in much the same way i don't need fire insurance for my house to not burn down. currently, yeah, i don't need to use guns to have free speech, but i also cannot tell the future. i don't know how things are going to go, and thus would rather have an additional layer beyond the legal routes to ensure that that freedom can remain.[/QUOTE] then you should correct yourself and say that "having a gun can help ensure you can have the capability to speak your mind freely in a tyrannical government" and acknowledge the fact that we currently don't have a tyrannical government the way you put it makes it look like you're quite literally compensating for something
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51255555]I think it's a fallacy that having a gun makes you free. one can be easily oppressed and shoved into an atomised corner but they feel like they are free because they get to go shoot some tincans and own a gun. The right to free speech trumps the right to firearms any and all of the time. Guns give you the power to destroy (whenever it be an old political system or a life). free speech grants me the power to think and to discuss, in turn the ability to create something more and as such is a considerably more powerful thing. A gun is a physical entity - a mere chunk of materialistic metal. my most essential freedoms are those immaterial - and a gun is not one of those. America is the sole nation on the planet where it claims to safeguard its freedoms by guns - in spite of the fact that there are literally dozens of nations crammed full of well-armed common people who fail time and time again to establish the conditions for freedom and instead end up with dictator after dictator. Why is it that every nation in Europe established a prosperous and free society without the need to get a second amendment? The idea that a gun gives you freedom - that only by owning this piece of complex machinery can I only ever be called a free man in control of my destiny? Bullshit.[/QUOTE] the gun does not make you free, that is not the argument. the gun is a tool that can be used to help safeguard those immaterial rights you, rightly so, hold dearly in the instance that the current systems of government encroach upon them. you would be foolish to assume that because things have worked fine for the past 100 years or so they will continue to be fine 100 years or more into the future. i hope that the arms are never needed to be used in this way, but i also do not want to remove the capability of those in the future to use them in such fashion should it become necessary.
i mean , i support 2nd amendment because i see it the same way i see drugs; they're so proliferated throughout the country that you'd screw over the everyday people while the bad elements will always have guns maybe we could have done something decades ago but not now but lets also strike this down stupid notion that second amendment has made us safer against government tyranny because thats not how it has worked for centuries when the blacks were considered second class citizens, where were the gun owners to demand freedom for them? when the japanese were interned simply because of their race despite no evidence whatsoever of espionage, where were the gun owners to demand their release? when citizens were forcefully drafted to fight in a shitty jungle far away, where the gun owners to intimidate the government into stopping the war? when the vietnam war protestors at kent state were massacred by government forces, where the gun owners to rising up to avenge their fallen americans? when they passed PATRIOT ACT and when NSA's spying was revealed that went against the constitution, where was the gun owners demanding their rights back? and when one presidential candidate proposed banning an entire religion from entering his country, majority of those that are pro-secondment was on his side you're not going to get a cartoony version of government tyranny where soldiers are going to strip your guns, block by block ransack you, and put you in chains until the brave secondment amendment freedom fighters come to save you you're going to have bunch of people listening to populism and fear then voluntarily giving up their rights then freely giving the government power to oppress others out of 'security' its why i laugh at the facebook posts like "THIS GERMAN WHO LIVED THROUGH HITLER TELLS YOU WHY YOU SHOULD KEEP YOUR GUNS". as if fucking Nazi's ran through Berlin and couped the leadership lol, they were supported by the Germans until it was too late.
This country's revolutionary war started when Britain wanted to take the guns away from the colonists. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord[/url] The simple fact of the matter is, all that really stands in the way of overturning the Bill of Rights is the courts. Particularly the Supreme Court. Last time the 2nd Amendment came up it was a split decision, 5-4. And one of those 5 judges is now dead. So that person's spot on the Supreme Court is up for grabs. The government can, and will, overstep its bounds. Most often on the proviso that they're doing it for safety and security. But that truly is the slippery slope. They will continue to push more and more legislation that says its for safety and security, like the Patriot Act (horribly named). Turning to the gun is an absolute last resort a free people have when all others fail. When speech is curtailed, when the press is turned into propaganda machines, when voting is ignored. Governments have done this, REPEATEDLY, throughout history. Did you know [url=http://www.usconstitution.net/china.html#Article35]China has freedom of speech, press, assembly, etc[/url]? Does this translate into reality? Nope. Because the only organ for forcing those freedoms is the government. And when the government decides that those "freedoms" are inconvenient they will be ignored. All laws are simply words on paper. The US Constitution is words on paper. If the Supreme Court decides to ignore it, if Congress decides to ignore it, and if the President decides to ignore it, what recourse is left to the people? That is why firearms ownership is so heavily protected. That is also why the founders of this country were very much against a standing army in peace time. Because that standing army can, and has, been directed against the people of the United States. Simply put, this stuff has happened before, and it will eventually happen again. Hopefully never, but human history is rife with repeats of the same old mistakes. I, for one, will not be apart of allowing those same mistakes to happen again.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.